Ethics In Research Triad P2YK

Anonymous

Introduction

Ethics in research is a somewhat nebulous concept. Although there is an underlying principle of morality in behaviour, the actual practice of what constitutes ethical research can be discussed using a variety of approaches. While different aspects of research may be the focus, there are also many concepts which are common to the majority of philosophies.

For this discussion, we have considered work by Aubrey (2005), Liamputtong (2010), Yin (2014), Resnick (2011) and O’Leary (2014). We felt that each author has made a contribution to developing an understanding of ethical research and what it comprises.

In order to begin a discussion on ethics, it is necessary to understand what the concept means. One working definition of ethics is that it “is a set of moral principles that aim to prevent research participants from being harmed by the researcher and the research process. The principles that underlie ethics are respecting the humanity of others as one would respect one’s own” (Liamputtong, 2010, p.31).

When examining the history of research, one can understand why this idea of protecting research participants evolved. World War 2 for example, was a time when many atrocities were committed to humans in the death camps resulting in the development of the Nuremburg Code in 1947 outlining ethical practices in research. Previous to this, mistreatment of slaves in the name of scientific research was very common. Unethical experimental research studies which resulted in harming the participants emotionally, psychologically, and physically were also seen in more modern times as late as the 1970s (Aubrey, 2005).

As a result of the historical unethical practices and treatment of specific participants, codes of ethics for professions and ethical committees have been created. These codes and committees attempt to prevent research misconduct by creating a climate of consideration for the participants well being. Unfortunately, some of these guidelines are not always clear as they are open to interpretation. The clarification of these is the role of the boards and ethics committees.

Basic Principles

During our research on this topic, we found that while the approaches and philosophies might vary, there were basic principles related to what must be considered in order to execute ethical research. Below is a composition of questions to consider based on a summary of our readings:

Ethics related to subjects or research participants

Does the research ensure that participants are not harmed emotionally, physically, or psychologically?

Do researchers ask for informed consent where there is an understanding of the research process? Is there some consideration regarding how culture impacts the ability to understand what is being consented to?

Does the researcher acknowledge the power imbalance between the researcher who is in control and the participants who are in a more submissive role by the very nature of the process of research?

Ethics related to researchers

Do researchers attempt to avoid biases- seeing what they are looking for or examining a topic from their own perspective and experience and interpreting data accordingly?

Does the collection of data consider the safety (physical and emotional) of the researchers themselves?

Is the issue of a power imbalance between researcher and participant acknowledged?

Does the researcher acknowledge limitations of the study?

Ethics related to the research process

Does the research possess a sound ethical basis in terms of design, execution and analysis?

Is the credibility of the researcher and therefore the process present? What are the credentials? Does the study make sense?

Is the research question valid? How does the analysis of the results relate to the question?

Does the research consider the confidentiality of the participants and the results? Do the participants understand how the results will be used?

Does the study explain the difference between confidentiality and anonymity so that the participants are able to decide if and how they want to be identified?

How will the results be used? Will they add to the body of knowledge in a positive way or will they be used for personal or financial gain?

How are participants solicited? Is there any type of remuneration or reward for participation which might affect the decision of the subject to participate? Is there equal representation from a variety of groups?

Has the research been approved by an institutional board of ethics?

How the research relates to each other

The summary above, examines the broad content of the questions which need to be considered in order to engage in ethical research practices. However, when looking individuals who speak to this issue, the areas of focus are often quite diverse.

In the authors we studied, Liamputtong (2010) looks at the ethics involved in cross-cultural research as an area of research which is quite prevalent at this time. She has a large historical foundation at the beginning of the chapter which allows the reader to develop context regarding the need for ethics in research. Liamputtong (2010) identifies many scenarios where minority groups were exploited for research before delving into ethical principles. The chapter on moral and ethical perspectives exclusively mentions the need for purposeful research and ensuring the balance between benefit and harm towards the participants. She also touches upon the difficulties researchers can have when conducting cross-cultural research. With Liamputtong’s (2010) focus on cross-cultural research, this book is very specific and has been able to highlight ethical concerns in this area; however, it is not as comprehensive or transferable to general research.The main point she stated has to do with the importance of qualitative research as the most recommended approach to make minority groups feel comfortable to freely tell their story and therefore for the researcher to gain the most complete understanding. The author also recommends the ‘focus group method’ along with ‘the healing methodology’ as fundamental forms to both, focus on transforming participants’ unfavourable lives and see them as human beings.

Much like Liamputtong (2010), Aubrey (2005) spends a lot of time on the historical perspective and the impact of culture on ethics (different perspectives on right and wrong, different interpretations of what is being explained in terms of consent). Again, this is a very important consideration for researchers who are studying a variety of cultures both at home and abroad.

O’Leary’s (2014) work, on the other hand, is more focused on how a researcher can actually plan and conduct ethical research. She emphasizes the researcher’s obligation to understanding the role of the researcher, how one can build an appropriate rapport with the subjects and how one can make sure they are researching within legal and morally appropriate criteria. Unfortunately, unlike Liamputtong (2010), the article is not specific to one subject area which makes it easier to generalize while being less focused. Furthermore, although there are examples throughout the chapter on individual aspects of ethics, there are no real case study examples that would help put a larger context to the information. Another shortcoming of this work is that it only briefly brushes on the history which we feel is an context to understand why ethics are important.

Similar to O’Leary (2014), Yin (2014) focuses on the practicalities of ethical behaviour. For example how to avoid bias – the researcher must be open to contrary evidence and include that in the discussion. Also, a good researcher must have responsibility to scholarship by not plagiarizing or falsifying information and accepting responsibility for one’s own work, even if it is not well received. Yin emphasizes that we must not do harm to participants and discusses the unique situation of children as participants in research. Finally, he points out another interesting feature that other authors had not mentioned, that the researcher must demonstrate a strong professional competence that includes keeping up with current research.

Resnik’s (2011) article, also, only briefly brushes over the history of ethics. He tries to explain where ethics is presented, learned and where we encounter differences. The article addresses how different groups follow different “ethical norms” which serve the purpose for their specific research. It also gives a nice clear definition of some of the ethical principles that are followed in different research areas. Resnik’s (2011) article presents a very simplistic, easy to follow, practical introduction to ethics. Like O’Leary (2014), Resnik (2011) presents researcher’s responsibilities to ensure their studies are ethical. In contrast to O’Leary (2014), Resnik (2011) gives some case study examples of clear ethically challenging situations, allowing readers to unpack unethical scenarios. Finally, Resnik (2011) concludes his article uniquely by attempting to identify reasons for researchers encountering misconduct in their research and speaking to the possibility of reducing situations of misconduct through ethical education. All other articles have been more focused on the presentation of facts rather than suggesting further exploration into furthering ethics in research.

To summarize, we can see that while there are common principles which are considered when examining ethical research, there are also a variety of approaches and focuses presented by authors. When conducting research today, existing conceptions of ethics must be re-evaluated as we study diverse cultures and children.

ORGANIZED BY

MORE TO READ

7 Comments

Questions:
1. What key considerations reduce subjectivity when choosing methods to conduct research with children’s participants
2. what aspects of this case study would you change to make it more ethical (without falling into an adult-centred approach)
3. Can you think of examples of emancipatory data collection techniques (i.e. ways to allow children to have more control over the research processes)
4. Should researchers inform and discuss the inner workings of research with children? Should children know that they are being observed and that someone is taking notes of their actions?

Question 3:
Consider the developmental needs of the child – the older the child the .

Ask the child to speak about their own progress in their own words.

Pose the research question to the children and ask them for ideas on how to get the information.

This type of structure addresses the imbalance of power because the children are involved in the design.
Ethical Considerations:
-It ensures that the participants are comfortable (therefore not harmed emotionally)
-Deals with your own biases and perceptions as children are giving input and their perspective
-Addresses consent as children are participating therefore consenting however we still have to have parental consent while leaving the opportunity to for the child to exit the research at any time.

Q#4 – Should researchers inform and discuss the inner workings of research with children? should children know than they are being observed and that someone is taking notes of their actions?
Triad #2 Response:
Yes, as part of informed consent any participant is to be told details of the procedures. Any information that would be given to an adult should be given to children. Deception is not allowed in research, unless justified and approved by a research board.
Yes, the children do need to be told. even with parental consent the child must know if they are under a microscope. This is basic informed consent.
Using language that the children are familiar with is important for proper consent.

1. Not enough information to evaluate in order to make it more ethical…BUT…
Perhaps the removal of the adult (the researcher)- watching or viewing the children from another room.

2. Asking for camera back was unethical from our POV. There does need to be some kind of reciprocity, but it just needs to be culturally appropriate. (Ex: Iraqi refugees were given sweets that is common in Iraq)

3. Her choice and location of the place should have been more carefully chosen, perhaps observing and understanding the place better and what are the norms of this community. For example, knowing that the children have several essential opportunities, such as helping outside the home, she would have thought of more carefully about the diaries and what she wanted from them.

4. Were there consent forms send home? How was the data contained? stored? Lots of missing information.

Question 1) What key considerations reduce subjectivity when choosing appropriate methods to conduct research with children participants?

a) Power relationships – children’s affective filter will be up with people viewed as experts or authority figures.
b) Establishing rapport is important, but how much? Also, how can we not be too intrusive but not be too cold?
c) Being careful of how to portray your intentions and talking to them, wording, tone.
d) Do you go to them, or they come to you? Location (comfortable home or intimidating building)?
e) Design of room (big, scary desk in an empty room or comfortable seat near the door in a cozy room)?
f) Children’s age, linguistic background. Misunderstanding words with non-native speakers. g) Using pictures, tables or other modes of collecting data. Communicating as best as possible on their level.
h) Method of choosing which subjects would most appropriate is also important.

NOTES FOR THE ARTICLE
Consent is a big issue concerning ethics when doing research with anyone. If research is done in cross cultural contexts discussing what can be done if participants do not want to sign can be important to discuss. For an example if the participants in a different country where you go to do the research do not want to sign consent forms because they don’t want their identity revealed what can be done otherwise? can a fake name be used. If the people do not believe in written consent like in some first nations cultures what can be done? If a child cannot write what can be used to gain permission instead.
Mechanical notes:
Checklists included are clear and concise & helpful.
Large quote (paraphrase further?): One working definition of ethics is that it “is a set of moral principles that aim to prevent research participants from being harmed by the researcher and the research process. The principles that underlie ethics are respecting the humanity of others as one would respect one’s own” (Liamputtong, 2010, p.31).
Elaborate on some specific studies that were performed, WW2 doesn’t give us proper context. Unethical research as late as 1970s (an example or two?)
Following is not particular enough: “As a result of the historical unethical practices and treatment of specific participants, codes of ethics for professions and ethical committees have been created.” à describe the “ethical committees” in more detail here,
I think you’re trying to say that ‘larger institutions (such as hospitals or universities) where research is performed typically have ethical committees’.
In section (1) of the basic principles, should “awareness of the ability to discontinue” be included here?
What is the intent of this article in particular? The paragraphs feel like book reviews rather than detailed explications of ethics in research. Although, those details in included, they do not seem to be the focus. → the description verbally in class was very clear when you summarized what the two articles did.
5th paragraph – “consideration for the participants’ well being”
Ethics related to subjects or research participants
“…regarding how culture impacts consent.” => also consideration of age, cognitive abilities?
“How research relates to each other” section
Title “How the research relates to each other” feels awkward – not concise.
1st paragraph – “However, when looking at individuals who speak…”
2nd paragraph – “…many scenarios where minority groups were exploited for research…” = examples?
End 2nd paragraph – what is “healing methodology”
“…fundamental forms to both” – both of whom?
3rd paragraph – take out parentheses & add comma, with
“…impact of culture on ethics, with different perspectives…”
4th paragraph – “which we feel is important context in understanding….”
5th paragraph – “For example, how to avoid…”
6th paragraph – nice use of comparison & contrast
“Finally, Resnik concludes his article uniquely…” – simplify & shorten sentence
“…presentation of facts, rather than…”
Summary is good but lacks depth of analysis.